代写 R html SAS database graph statistic Laboratory/Technical Report Writing Guidelines

Laboratory/Technical Report Writing Guidelines
by Student(s) Name For ISE XXXX Course Title
Date (?)
Course Code and Section # Assignment #(?) Instructor: XXXXXX

General Technical Report Guideline 1
1. INTRODUCTION TO THIS GUIDE
The following is a research report format used by many scientific disciplines, READ IT and FOLLOW IT. Unless you are instructed to do something different, submit all lab and technical report assignments using this format; you will be graded on your ability to do so. If an assignment consists of two activities, then divide the report into two sections; but both should be described in the same report. If the two activities are related and dependent upon each other, you can treat them as one activity. Efforts have been made to develop this guide in the same format that is expected for your assignments.
2. STYLISTIC MATTERS
For all reports, the font size for all written text should be no smaller than 12-point. The only exception to this rule is for tables or figures where it is acceptable to use 10-point font for clarity. Spacing should be 1.5 throughout the entire document including references and tables. DO NOT use an indentation to begin a paragraph. Instead, separate paragraphs by using a blank line. All text should be left justified.
The margins of the document are to be one inch (top, bottom, left, and right). Remember, the default setting of most processing software is larger than this requirement. Page numbers should be included on each page except for the title page, and located in either the upper or lower right hand corner. The title page does not count as a page, therefore page 1 is the first page of text. A running title may be included in the top right corner as a header. A running title is a 1-5 word shortened version of the title of the assignment. It should be descriptive in that a reader should be able to identify the report topic by this shortened title. For example, if the title of a report is “Measuring Electromyography during Maximum Voluntary Contraction in Different Forearm Postures”, an appropriate running title could be “EMG of the Forearm”.
Major headings should be numbered numerically, left justified, in bold, and in all caps (e.g. 1. INTRODUCTION, 2. METHODS, etc.). Secondary headings should be numbered numerically within that section, left justified, title case, and underlined (e.g. 2.1 Participants, 2.2 Equipment, etc.). Other minor headings should be numbered numerically within that subsection,

General Technical Report Guideline 2 left justified, title case, and italicized (e.g. 2.1.1 Gender Distribution, 2.1.2 Age Distribution,
etc.).
Referenced works in the document should follow the styles below:
The reported number of carpal tunnel syndromes cases in 1999 was greater than 27,000 (BLS, 2001).
OR
The US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) (2001) reported that over 27,000 new carpal tunnel syndrome cases were reported in 1999.
Never write in the first person. Always use third person. For example, “Participants were asked to write the words they could remember.” OR “After a brief time interval, participants were asked to report which words were remembered and how many were remembered.” If this was written in first person (which is INCORRECT), it would read: “We were asked to write the words we could remember.” OR “After a brief time interval, we were asked to report….”
DO NOT use abbreviations in the text (except acronyms—such as VT for Virginia Tech). (That is do not use “lab” for laboratory, etc.). If you do use an acronym, be sure to define it (e.g., Virginia Tech (VT)) at its first use.
DO NOT use contractions (e.g., don’t, won’t, he’s, etc.). Also use apostrophes sparingly. For example, use “VT Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP)” instead of “VT’s Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP)”. You will need to still use apostrophes for possessives in sentences however.
The entire report should be no more than 5-7 pages including references, tables, and figures. Not included in the page count are the title page and any appendices (such as raw data or data analysis tables—ANOVA, etc.). Appendices do not have to be included, but they may be useful in clearing up inconsistencies in the report.

General Technical Report Guideline 3
3. BODY OF THE REPORT
It is expected that there will be a minimum of 4 main headings: INTRODUCTION, METHODOLOGY, RESULTS, and CONCLUSIONS (sometimes called DISCUSSION). The subheadings used to group information under each heading will vary from assignment to assignment. It should be noted that technical reports sometimes begin with an Executive Summary, but for these assignments, we will not include one. As such, the common subheadings will include:
v Under Introduction: Objectives, Hypotheses, Problem Statement (if this is a technical report you probably won’t have a hypothesis, but you will have a problem statement or objective that will blend into the of your last introductory paragraph)
v Under Methodology: Participants, Equipment, Dependent/Independent Variables, Procedure, Data Analysis, Task Description
v Under Results: Varies by data analysis method
v Under Conclusions: Summary of Findings, Directions for Future Research
A brief description of what is to be included in each section is provided. Be aware that not all headings and subheadings will apply to every assignment. Use the headings that are most appropriate or develop your own to describe to the reader what you did in your assignment.
3.1 Introduction
The introduction discusses the issue and frames it in terms of importance and need. While some would disagree or look down on this, think of it as a sales pitch – a reason for the reader to read on with interest. Questions to ask when writing the Introduction are: What am I exploring? Why is it important (as in what are the current costs, how many are affected)? What problems exist that makes it necessary to address the research issue or question? What is written should answer these questions. Give specific, real-world examples. Think of the INTRODUCTION as the “who cares” or “so what” section – this is a brief space to convince the reader that this report is important, relevant, interesting, and that they should take the time to read it. Include the purpose or objectives of the laboratory and any other preliminary information deemed important. Also, you should include a minimum of 2 references relating to the topic of interest from journals and or government database – like the bureau of labor statistics (BLS).

General Technical Report Guideline 4
3.2 Methodology
A large portion of the grade will be based on the clarity and quality of the information provided in this section. The METHODOLOGY section contains all critical features of the study or activity. This is the section that, in the real world, other researchers will follow to replicate the study. The METHODOLOGY section typically has subheadings (Participants, Equipment, Procedures, Data Analysis, …). Here are some examples of subheadings which may appear in these reports (though it is not exhaustive).
3.2.1 Participants
This section should discuss the number of participants in the study (do not call them “subjects”). In addition, any other characteristics relevant to the study should be included. For example, it might be important at some point to describe the mean age of your participants. When means are reported, standard deviations must also be reported. An example would be:
The mean age of participants in this study was 23.2 years (SD = 2.99). OR
Seventy-two participants were included in this study. Thirty-six were males (M = 34.56, SD = 7.32) and 36 were females (M = 38.91, SD = 1.8).
OR
The study included 36 participants ranging in age from 21 – 86. (Ranges are O.K. to use
sometimes).
If this is a technical report and you are observing operators in real life work situations, refer to them as operators and include gender. You may have the ability to gather anthropometric data on them, you may not. If you have it, include it, if you don’t, that is fine.
3.2.2 Equipment, Apparatus, Questionnaire, or Measurement Instrument
In this section, describe all tools, equipment, tasks, questionnaires, demographic documents, etc. that were used to collect data (how they were applied, how they are scored, ranges in scores, etc.). Provide sufficient detail that any reader could use the tools, etc. without training or viewing a copy of the instrument. If a questionnaire or other paper-based tool is used, be sure to include a copy in the appendix and reference it in the text. For example, “A demographic questionnaire was used to collected individual participant anthropometrics (Appendix A).”.

General Technical Report Guideline 5
3.2.3 Procedure
This section is basically a recipe. It is a step-by-step explanation of what was done in the exploration. Everything should be described in the order in which it occurred.
3.2.4 Data Analysis
In this section, state what statistical procedures were used to analyze the data and identify the statistical software package used. For example, “Studentized t-tests were used to test for differences between mean muscle activity across experimental conditions using SAS 8.0 statistical software”, “Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviations, frequencies) were computed for each independent variable considered using Excel”, etc.
3.3 Results
This section will also play a major role in the determination of report grades. This section varies based on the complexity of the experimental design. The RESULTS section should, for the most part, consist of paragraphs that provide numerical or statistical data. Tables and/or figures can be included, but they should be used to convey useful information not easily conveyed in paragraph form. (If tables and figures are used, describe the main findings included in them. Presentation of a set of tables for the RESULTS section is not sufficient. An example is provided below.)
The number of work related musculoskeletal disorders resulting in lost workdays peaked in 1994 and has declined slightly in recent years (Figure 1). However, the percentage of these disorders to total injuries and illness reported has increased in recent years from 64% in 1995 to 67% in 1999 (BLS, 2001).

General Technical Report Guideline 6
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Year
Figure 1. Total number of WMSD cases resulting in lost workdays reported to the BLS through 1997 (BLS, 1999) *Numbers are in thousands
It may be helpful to divide the results sections into subsections if a large number of results are to be presented. The results section is where the findings are presented. NO INTERPRETATION for why the findings are such as they are. Interpretation will be presented in the final section of the report.
3.4 Discussion
In this section, reiterate the objectives of the report or study, then interpret the findings. Incorporate information from the lectures, class discussions, articles, or other sources and compare the results (this is where you can use your 2 references from earlier). Are they the same or different? If they differ, provide some hypotheses as to why differences were noted. State the major limitations of the study. A number of these will be related to the experimental design (the second topic of the semester), but others may exist. Always end the Discussion with two or three sentences that communicate the real-world implications of the study. What do the results mean? It is also important to answer the “So what” or “Who cares” question in this section.
4. REFERENCES
Use the format in the International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. You can retrieve a copy of how to format various sources of information such as journals, books, conference proceedings, internet sources, etc. from
Number of Reported WMSD Lost Workday Cases

General Technical Report Guideline 7
http://authors.elsevier.com/GuideForAuthors.html?PubID=505654&dc=GFA. In general, these are classified under the APA referencing style, although some journals deviate a tad. Try to adhere to the guidelines as you cite within your report, and as you create a references section at the end of your document.
5. TABLES
All tables should be have a number (e.g., Table 1), include a descriptive title (e.g., Results of stepwise logistic regression procedure for predicting CTS), and be left justified. Tables should have no lines except for a top, bottom, and bottom of the headings. If needed, reduce the font size of a table to 10 pt. See below for an example. Tables should be included in the text or appendix if used, not in a separate section. The table should appear following the paragraph in which it was referenced. For example: The tasks, exposure classification and number of operators evaluated on each task are presented in Table 1. Do not include a table in the text if it is not referenced in the text. Do not bleed tables across two pages (that is, a table should appear on one page). If there is insufficient room for a table to fit on the page immediately following a paragraph, insert the next paragraph to push the table onto the next page. Table headings are placed ON TOP OF THE TABLE
Table 1. Selected job tasks for investigation based on preliminary exposure and number of persons evaluated
Job Task Horizontal Fish Loaders Skinners Vertical Fish Loaders Trimmers
Strip Cutters
6. FIGURES
Exposure Classification High Repetition Low Repetition High Repetition High Repetition High Repetition
No. Operators 11
11
11
10
10
All figures should have a number (e.g., Figure 1, 2), include a descriptive title (e.g., Total number of WMSD cases resulting in lost workdays for 1999), and be centered under the figure. Figures should have no borders except a line above the title. See below for an example. IF the data are continuous in nature (i.e., trends over days, over increasing weights, speeds, etc), use a

General Technical Report Guideline 8
line graph. If the data are discrete (ie, differences between groups, tasks), use a bar graph. If you are showing a correlation or predictive relationship between variables, use a scatter plot with a line of best fit and correlation coefficient included. Figures should be included in the text or appendix if used, not in a separate section. The figure should appear following the paragraph in which it was referenced. For example: Example nerve movement distances as a function of wrist posture for two participants are presented in Figure 2. I prefer no gridlines, but gridlines are acceptable. Gridlines clutter up a figure in my opinion. I also prefer no shading, or 3D effects. If the results are good, there should be no need to use smoke and mirrors (i.e.,shading and 3d effects) to make them look better. Simpler is easier, and clearer to the reader. Figure captions are placed UNDERNEATH THE FIGURE
6 4 2 0
-2 -4
F E R U RF RE Posture
Figure 2. Excursion values as a result of complex wrist posture.
Note: F = Flexion, E = Extension, R = Radial Deviation, U = Ulnar Deviation
7. APPENDICES (or just APPENDIX if you have only 1)
The word “APPENDICES” or “APPENDIX” should be centered in the middle of a blank page. If more than one appendix is used, then list the appendices with a title on the page described in the previous sentence (see the next pages for an example). The first page of each new appendix should have the appendix number or letter and title underlined, in bold and all caps, centered above the text. Each page of the appendices should be numbered like the rest of the document. Spacing in the appendix can be single-spaced.
Participant 1 Participant 2
Transverse Excursion (mm)

General Technical Report Guideline
9
Appendices
Appendix A: Laboratory Report Evaluation Form
Appendix B: Sample Laboratory Report (from a difference class, but it gives you an idea)

General Technical Report Guideline 10 APPENDIX A: LABORATORY REPORT EVALUATION
Introduction (10%)
Methodology (25%)
Results (20%)
Purpose Statement – Describes the objectives and goals of the project
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Poor Excellent
Significance of the proposed work – Verbal description of the need for this type of study
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Poor
Discussion of the procedures used in the study
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Poor
Description of the population, equipment, data analysis, etc. (if applicable)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Poor
Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
10 Excellent
Conclusions (20%)
Overall Report (25%)
Clarity of the concepts
1 2 3 4 5 6 Poor
Appropriateness of the data analysis technique 1 2 3 4 5 6 Poor
Quality of the tables, figures, etc.
1 2 3 4 5 6 Poor
Clarity of the concepts
1 2 3 4 5 6 Poor
Quality of the design solutions
1 2 3 4 5 6 Poor
Discussion of the major findings of the project 1 2 3 4 5 6 Poor
Discussion of the limitation/errors of the project
7 8 9 7 8 9
7 8 9 7 8 9
7 8 9 7 8 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Poor
Appearance
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Poor
Uniformity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Poor
Organization
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Poor
Professionalism/Quality
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Poor
Grammar/Spelling/Writing, etc.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Poor
Overall Percent:

General Technical Report Guideline 11 APPENDIX B: SAMPLE LABORATORY REPORT
Measuring Electromyography during Maximum Voluntary Contraction In Different Forearm Postures
Paul Johnston Paula Mills Deepti Sood Grace Tran
Spring 2XXX Assignment # 1
ISE 4624 Work Physiology 8:00 Instructor: K. Babski-Reeves

General Technical Report Guideline 12 1.0 INTRODUCTION
Electromyography (EMG) is a useful analytical method when applied under proper conditions and integrated in light of basic physical, biomechanical, and recording principles. When EMG is used to evaluate light, repetitive tasks, this technique can compare the specific musculoskeletal stress in certain muscles associated with various work postures, positions, and activities. EMG is not only used to validate ergonomic principles, but also used as input to biomechanical models describing synergistic effects of muscle activation on the joint. Therefore, EMG use is important in seeing if particular muscle groups are affected adversely because of improper work place design.
Maximum Voluntary Contraction (MVC) is the strength capacity of an individual. Indirectly, the force magnitude internally imposed on a body structure or an external load on a body structure is measured with EMG. Directly, EMG measures the Action Potential when a muscle is stimulated or excited by these forces from loads or exertions. The force magnitude in EMG is expressed in Newtons (N) or pounds (lbs) or sometimes as a proportion of MVC (Bernard and Putz-Anders, 1997).
In this experimental study, the use of electromyography was used to determine the MVC of the forearm in three different positions: pronation, supination and neutral. The study was conducted on one participant, in which three MVC trials were evaluated per forearm position. The objectives of this laboratory experiment were to become familiar with electromyography and its applications in MVC studies.
2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Participant
The participant was a 23-year old male undergraduate student, at the Grado Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech. The participant was screened for any musculoskeletal problems of the wrist, hand, arm and shoulder that might hinder his taking part in the study. The participant was also asked to fill in a questionnaire on his demographics and past history of injuries and musculoskeletal problems that he might have faced in any part of the upper extremity.

General Technical Report Guideline 13
2.2 Apparatus
The basic setup consisted of apparatus for collecting the EMG data (which included electrodes, electrode wires, preamplifier and the Electromyograph from Measurement Systems Inc., with Band Pass filter of 10-500Hz), the grip strength tester for the purpose of conducting MVC task, goniometer to measure joint angles, an anthropometric kit to take anthropometric measures, a tape measure, a work table and a height adjustable chair for the participant.
For EMG data collection, three Ag/AgCl bar electrodes were used for recording the electrical activity in the muscle. Two electrodes were used in the bipolar configuration and the third electrode, called the reference electrode was used to ground the signal. An EMG Preamplifier was placed as close as possible to the muscle under study and it amplified the signal by a few thousand times so that the signal was not lost in the external noise from the environment. The signal collected by the Preamplifier was then sent to the EMG Amplifier, which further amplified the signal obtained from the muscle (gain of 5 and time constant of 110ms). A Labview program specially created for the purpose of collecting EMG data at a sampling rate of 1024Hz.
2.3 Procedures
On participant’s arrival, he was asked some demographic and a questionnaire on musculoskeletal problems, if any, faced by the participant. The participant was asked to sit on a chair that was adjusted so that the participant’s knee was at 90 degrees. Anthropometric measurements were collected for the seating height (height of the seat pan from the floor), the shoulder height (height of the acromion from the floor), the elbow height (height of elbow from the floor), the table height (height of the table from the floor), upper arm length (acromion to radiale) and forearm length (radiale to the radial stylion).
Pre-testing of the procedures was performed before starting the MVC experiment to ensure proper calibration of the EMG amplifier and to ensure that the participants and all the group members understood the procedures.

General Technical Report Guideline 14
The first part of the experiment consisted of setting up of the EMG electrodes on the flexor carpi radialis muscle. The electrode locations were determined by drawing a line that connected the medial epicondyle and the insertion point of the biceps tendon. Moving approximately three to four fingerbreadths distal to the midpoint of the line, a mark was then made at the belly of the flexor carpi radialis muscle. For the reference electrode, a point was marked on the boniest part of the elbow. Next, skin preparation was done before putting on the electrodes to ensure a clean contact surface between the skin and EMG electrodes. The skin where the electrodes were to be placed was shaved and buffed to remove hair and dead skin cells. Next the skin was cleansed thoroughly with alcohol. The skin was then allowed to dry for a minute to ensure that the contact surface of the electrodes do not come in contact with any moisture that might be left on the surface. The participant was asked to place his arm in the same posture as in the specific MVC task. The forearm, wrist, and hand were resting on the table in a neutral, relaxed position (90 degrees from full pronation/supination). The arm was held in place to ensure the skin would not stretch or loosen with changes in functional posture. A line perpendicular to the length of the muscle was then drawn to mark the location of the first electrode. The second electrode was placed approximately 25mm from the first electrode; the reference electrode was placed on the radial stylion at the elbow.
The impedance of the electrodes was checked using a voltmeter. The styluses of the voltmeter were placed on the electrode heads to ensure that the impedance of the skin did not exceed 10kOhms. Following the fixation of the electrodes to the skin, the electrode wires were attached to the electrode heads. Cloth tape was also applied over the wires to minimize any movement of the electrodes during the experiment.
During connection testing, the participant was asked to flex his forearm to adjust the gain. After successful set-up and pre-testing of the electrodes, thus began the experimental session.
The MVC experiments consisted of grip postures at three different posture angles. The participant was instructed to sit straight in chair, with knees flexed at 90 degrees. Observations were made of the participant during the session when MVC reading were being taken. The standard method used in collecting MVC was a ramp-up, ramp-down model.

General Technical Report Guideline 15
The three postures tested in this experiment consisted of the forearm in neutral position, full supination, and full pronation. The participant was asked to keep his elbow flexed at a 90-degree angle and upper arm in adduction. A total of 3 trials were performed for each forearm position. For each trial, the participant gradually increased his muscle force to the maximum, held the maximum force for approximately one second, and then gradually decreased the force until the forearm was relaxed. A rest period of 2 minutes was given between each MVC trial to ensure fatigue did not affect maximum effort. The maximum force exerted was recorded after each MVE trial.
2.4 Description of Variables
Three levels of the single independent variable, the wrist posture, were studied. The three levels were: wrist in neutral posture, wrist pronated and wrist in supination. The confounding variables were the subject variability, unfamiliarity of the task and equipment to the participant and variability in task performance due to the non-standardization of the posture. The dependent measure under study was the grip strength studied using the maximum voluntary contraction principles.
2.5 Data Analysis
JMP was used to analyze the data obtained. It was used to examine the inter subject variability in performing the MVC task. It was also used to see any significant difference in MVC values for different postures.
3.0 RESULTS
The results of the experiment are shown in Tables 3.1 and 3.2. The mean values in Table 3.2 indicated that the participant was able to exert the maximum force in the neutral position (mean = 3.95), and the least amount of force in the supination posture (mean = 2.92).
The results from the one-factor, three-level ANOVA test showed that a significant difference was present in the maximum strength conducted in the various positions (Appendix). A pair- wise comparison between the supination and neutral position showed a significant difference in mean MVCs. The other pair-wise comparisons were not significant.

General Technical Report Guideline
16
Table 3.1 MVC values obtained for three different forearm postures
Posture
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3
Neutral (V)
3.83 4.50 3.53
Pronation (V)
2.59 3.23 3.19
Pronation (V)
3.0033
3.1900 0.35851 0.12853
Supination (V)
2.55 3.16 3.04
Supination (V)
2.9166
3.0400 0.32316 0.10443
Table 3.2 Descriptive Statistics
Posture
Mean Median Std. Deviation V ariance
Neutral (V)
3.9533
3.8300 0.49662 0.24663
4.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Monitoring the participant during the three MVC exertions was important, as the results of the EMG data may have been influenced. The subject variables include changes in limb position, body position, joint angle differences, feedback effects, grip position on the device, or breathing rate. Each of these can skew results of maximum voluntary contraction. Other factors that may have affected EMG reliability and should be considered in interpreting the results are as follows: muscle physiology, muscle efficiency, electrode placement, electrode type, skin and surface tissue, measurement system and impedance, and signal-to-noise ratio.
Additional confounding factors that may have influenced EMG data include training and hand dominance. Prior training to perform MVC tasks would most likely increase the values due to more familiarization with the procedures. Hand dominance could also create a strength bias. A key variable is participant history. The participant has had numerous wrist injuries. Both scaphoids were fractured twice and the right ulna had been fractured once. The participant is an endurance athlete who also rock climbs and weight trains on a regular basis. Since his long workouts or climbs are primarily on the weekends, the day in which the experiment was

General Technical Report Guideline 17
performed may have affected the maximum performance. The experimental data was collected on a Tuesday morning, when the participant may still have been recovering.

General Technical Report Guideline 18 REFERENCES
Bernard, B.P., (1997). Musculoskeletal Disorders and Workplace Factors: A Critical Review of Epidemiology for Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders of the Neck, Upper Extremity, and Low Back, Neck Musculoskeletal Disorders: Evidence for Work-Relatedness, Chapter 2, NIOSH Ergo Science #97-141a.
Casali, J.G., Wolstad, J.C. (2001). Workplace Design: Biomechanics and Anthropometry. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Tech Copy Center.
Kroemer, K., Kroemer, H., and Kroemer-Elbert, K. (1994). Human Senses. Ergonomics: How to Design for Ease and Efficiency. Englewood Hills, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Marras, W., (1992). Selected Topics in Surface EMG for Use in the Occupational Setting: Expert Perspective, “Overview of EMG in Ergonomics,” Chapter 1, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 91-100.
Sanders, M.S. and McCormick, E.J. (1993). Applied Anthropometry, Work-Space Design and Seating. In Rogers, C., and Holton, T. (Eds.) Human Factors in Engineering and Design (pg. 415-417) (7th Edition). New York: NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Shrawan and Anil, Electromyography in Ergonomics. (Note: Incomplete reference)

General Technical Report Guideline
19
Appendix: Data Analysis Tables

General Technical Report Guideline
20
APPENDIX: DATA ANALYSIS TABLES Observations made about the participants behavior during the experiment
Posture Neutral Pronation Supination
ANOVA Tables
ANOVA (single Factor – three levels)
Observed Behavior
Right arm was straight, Posture straight, Relaxed posture
Elbow stuck out, Body leaned to left, Shoulder dropped; looking at monitor Elbow in towards body, Body shifted to left
Groups Neutral
Pronation
Supination Source of Variation
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
Count Sum
3 11.86 3 9.01 3 8.75
Average
3.95333 3.00333 2.91667 MS 0.99234 0.15987
Average
2.916667 3.953333
MS
1.612017 0.175533
Average
3.003333 2.916667
MS
0.011267 0.116483
Average
3.953333 3.003333 MS
V ariance
0.24663 0.12853 0.10443 F 6.20733
Variance
0.104433 0.246633
F
9.183536
Variance
0.128533 0.104433
F
0.096723
Variance
0.246633 0.128533 F
SS
1.984689 0.9592 2.943889
df
2 6 8
8.75 11.86
df
1 4 5
P-value
0.03459
P-value
0.038764
P-value
0.771331
P-value
F crit
5.143249
F crit
7.70865
F crit
7.70865
F crit
2.1 Neutral vs. Supination Posture
Groups Supination Neutral
Source of Variation Between Groups Within Groups
Total
Count
3
3
SS
1.612017 0.702133 2.31415
Sum
2.2 Pronation vs Supination Posture
Groups Pronation Supination
Source of Variation Between Groups Within Groups
Total
Count SS
0.011267 0.465933 0.4772
3 3
Sum
9.01 8.75
df
1 4 5
Sum
11.86 9.01 df
2.3 Neutral vs. Pronation Posture
Groups Neutral
Pronation
Source of Variation
Count
3
3
SS

General Technical Report Guideline
21
Between Groups Within Groups
Total
1.35375 0.750333 2.104083 5
1 1.35375 7.216793 0.054862 7.70865 4 0.187583